TED Conversations

TED
  • TED
  • New York, NY
  • United States

TEDCRED 10+

This conversation is closed.

Discuss the note to the TED community on the withdrawal of the TEDxWestHollywood license.

For discussion: http://blog.ted.com/2013/04/01/a-note-to-the-ted-community-on-the-withdrawal-of-the-tedxwesthollywood-license

Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Apr 6 2013: Sahtouris continued...
    these historic leaps in belief demanded by the results of scientific research itself! If they did, they would have to reject the Copernican revolution among others.

    Sheldrake and I, without knowing each other’s work, both wrote in the 1980s that the concept of natural mechanism (one fundamental assumption about the nature of the universe) was illogical once scientists had rejected the concept of God, since Descartes’ God was the Grand Engineer inventing the machinery of nature. Without inventors there are no machines of the sort humans build. As God had been the source of creative intelligence, it was decided that natural machinery without God had to come about by accident. My point is that all this was a matter of changing cultural belief, NOT scientific fact. Other assumptions of western science include, for example, that consciousness emerges in a non-conscious universe, that life comes from non-life and that nature can be studied objectively.

    Actually, there are a range of culturally based scientific assumptions about the universe and the means to study it upon which legitimate and successful sciences not only could be based, but on which they already are based, and these assumptions can be utterly antithetical in different sciences, such as whether consciousness gives rise to matter (Vedic science) or that matter gives rise to consciousness (western science). Two international symposia of scientists I convened in Japan and Malaysia clearly identified such differences in assumptions and gave evidence that some, such as Vedic and Islamic science, are entirely compatible with religious or spiritual beliefs.

    What we need is a legitimized Global Consortium of Sciences that recognize the impossibility of founding a science on anything other than cultural beliefs! Let’s get honest about what science is!!!

    The current paradigm shift in western science, historically necessary as a review and revision of those necessary but ...see next post..

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.